People in general attach too much importance to the outcome of the China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED), and regard only its achievements and the problems it solves as the highlight of this mechanism. However, what's more important is the spirit of the dialogue - the willingness from both sides to confront and control divergences, and this should be the real focal point of discussion.

Cooperation is surely of great significance, but if disagreements between the two countries get out of control, it is possible that major problems will be triggered. Therefore, the way Beijing and Washington are treating each other, not giving each other the cold shoulder as the US and the Soviet Union did during the Cold War but conducting discussions and exchanges in a frank and honest manner, should be considered the highlight of the S&ED, and seen as even more important than collaboration.

Now the US is facing a relative decline, while China is rising rapidly. The global geopolitical landscape is undergoing a gradual transformation, during which nationalism among the academic circle and the public will likely emerge. Just like when the Cold War started, scholars from both sides started to bad-mouth each other. These days a growing number of US intellectuals hold a hostile attitude toward China, claiming that the bilateral ties between the two nations are reaching a "tipping point," and suggesting it is time for Washington to take a harder, tougher stance toward China.

It is definitely not responsible for them to show their mood this way, but it is inevitable.

Rather than arguing that China is challenging a declining US, it might be more accurate to say that the White House is upset about an emerging China. The truth is, Beijing has never intended to pose any challenge to Washington, and all China has ever wanted is a peaceful coexistence. Thus, it is the US' overreaction that has caused today's tension. In this new atmosphere, more understanding from Beijing is needed about the sensitive mentality of a fading major power.

It is also realistic to say that the US' response is not as optimistic as we expected when China has worked its hardest to establish the new type of major power relationship with the country.

Even if neither China's leaders nor its citizens are hoping their country acquires global leadership, with the massive scale of its economic activities the nation's influence will inevitably grow. In light of this, figuring out how to wield this power positively has become a crucial task for Chinese leaders.

That's why they have raised the idea to establish a community of common destiny, spared no effort to build more consensus and common understanding and launched initiatives of mutual benefit such as the "One Belt, One Road."

Yet one thing remains unchanged, which is that China takes the Sino-US relationship as the cornerstone of its overall diplomacy. Over many years to come, major threats to China's national security will still come from the US, and the US alliance with Japan. From this perspective, maintaining a good relationship with Washington will not only benefit China's own development, but also help maintain world peace.

In the old days, war was the natural fate for major powers. When strong forces get together, wars were the norm while peace was abnormal. What China is pursuing now is resisting this "fate" and seeking an "abnormal" state, and that is the whole point of the major power relationship.

The process might be bumpy, but the course for the future can be viewed optimistically. Apart from the S&ED, Chinese President Xi Jinping's highly-anticipated visit to the US in September is another upbeat sign of divergence management. As long as fresh controversies don't emerge, and the ties between the two countries remain stable, the nitty-gritty of every other thorny problem, including issues related to the Korean Peninsula or the South China Sea, will be under control.